- Please send as far and wide as possible.
Editor, The Konformist
A couple new interviews with Adam Gorightly are up! Check out my
recent interview with R.U. Sirius discussing "The Prankster and the
And if that wasn't enough to make you pee your pants, Part One of a
two part interview with "Out There Radio" is now available at:
Part One will also cover "The Prankster and the Conspiracy". Part
Two, yet to be posted, will get into my latest book, "The Beast of
Adam Gorightly: Collected Rantings 1992-2004." Don't you dare miss
And while you're listening to wacky stuff on internet radio, you
might as well navigate over to:
and check out "Untamed Dimensions", a brand spanking new
blogtalkradio program hosted by yours truly. My most recent
interview features the charming and irrepressible Alexandra "Chica"
Bruce, discussing--among other things--the weird sex practices of
Tibetan Buddhists, not to mention the mind-bending mysteries
surrounding the Montauk Experiments.
On the next episode of "Untamed Dimensions", scheduled for broadcast
on December 7, I'll be joined by my guests Jeff Turner and Douglas
Hawes who reveal "The Secret History of the Summer of Love", a
conspiratorial cosmology involving `60's sex kitten Tuesday Weld, an
alleged descendant from a bloodline of Druidic witches, who secretly
influenced such counterculture luminaries as the Beatles and the
Rolling Stones, exercising her occult power in the realms of
Also (if I haven't already thoroughly bombarded your brain with
astounding proportions of bulldada!) check out the latest edition
of "Paranoia: The Conspiracy Magazine" featuring an article once
again by yours truly, entitled "Manson Family Secrets: Charlie, The
Process and RFK".
Greg Palast- Found: Saddam's Weapon of Mass Destruction
By Greg Palast
[Washington] December 3, 2006
This photo of condemned Iraqi ex-strongman Saddam Hussein amid
exotic weapons of mass destruction, taken just before the liberation
of Iraq, was released Saturday by the White House.
Proclaiming that the long-awaited evidence of Saddam's deadly
weaponry was now irrefutable, Presidential spokesman Tony Snow
displayed the picture of Saddam with bow and arrows [read the
original NY Times article] at a special briefing for the Washington
"These are 'dirty' arrows, capable of delivering radioactive
material wherever shot," said Snow. While conceding that there was
as yet no evidence that Saddam had the capability to 'nuclearize'
these warheads, sources close to the Office of Special Plans at the
Pentagon stated that, "The purpose of a 'dirty arrow' is not to kill
but to spread destructive mass panic." The official, who spoke on
condition of anonymity, added "Imagine the deadly effect if one of
these babies was shot into the goal post at the Super Bowl game
during Shakira's half-time show."
Administration defense policy advisor Richard Perle, speaking from
the American Enterprise Institute, noted that Saddam clearly had the
means to greatly multiply the deadly panic effect of a dirty arrow
attack by use of a "war whoop," which Perle demonstrated by
repeatedly placing the closed fingers of one hand against his lips
while intoning, "whoo-whoo-whoo-whoo."
The discovery of hard evidence of Saddam's dirty arrow program
vindicates the claims of Iraqi exile leader Ahmad Chalabi that
Saddam had concealed large caches of war paint and battle feathers.
During a scheduled impromptu chat with the press held at his ranch
in Crawford, Texas, the President said, "Well, this should put an
end to my critics and the nay-sayers and the cutters and runners who
said we were fibbing about Saddam's WMDs."
Because of the extreme danger to the American public of such arrows,
Mr. Bush said his father, the former president, had given him for
his recent birthday a bow and arrows "with these little rubber
suction thingies on the end."
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, reached in Baghdad, when
asked about the new dirty arrow revelations said, "You're kidding
me, right?" General Powell was in Iraq to continue the hunt for the
biological weapons laboratories whose photos he displayed to the
United Nations in the lead-up to the 2003 invasion.
"Hey, a picture's worth a thousand words -- or fifty thousand
lives," said the General, laughing hysterically as he locked himself
inside one of Saddam's "mobile laboratories" filled with nothing but
Greg Palast is the author of the bestseller, "Armed Madhouse: Who's
Afraid of Osama Wolf? and other Dispatches from the Front Lines of
the Class War."
Donate $75 or more to the Investigative Fund (tax-deductible) and
receive a signed copy of Armed Madhouse (hardbound). Gifts can be
personalized (give us the name of the recipient in the "message
"Armed Madhouse is great fun. Palast, detective style, provides
pieces of the secret puzzle." - The New Yorker
A New Statesman book of the year.
BOARD OF HEALTH VOTES TO PHASE OUT ARTIFICIAL TRANS FAT FROM NEW
YORK CITY'S RESTAURANTS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Release # 114-06
Tuesday, December 5, 2006
CONTACT: (212) 788-5290; 788-3058 (After Hours)
Andrew Tucker (atucker@...)
Sara Markt (smarkt@...)
BOARD OF HEALTH VOTES TO PHASE OUT ARTIFICIAL TRANS FAT FROM NEW
YORK CITY'S RESTAURANTS
Health Department Facilitates Restaurant Implementation, Ensures
Phased Removal of Artificial Trans Fat from Restaurants by July 1,
NEW YORK CITY December 5, 2006 Restaurants are a major source of
artificial trans fat, but customers currently have no practical way
to know whether food they eat contains it. Today, the New York City
Board of Health voted unanimously to make New York City even
healthier by requiring that all City restaurants remove artificial
trans fat over the next 18 months. New York City is the first
location in the nation to ensure removal of artificial trans fat
from restaurants. Artificial trans fat increases the risk of heart
disease, stroke, and death by increasing bad cholesterol and
decreasing good cholesterol. The final notice of adoption is online
Health Commissioner Dr. Thomas R. Frieden said, "The day we
introduced this proposal, we emphasized that we would review public
comments carefully. The message we heard was clear: New Yorkers
overwhelmingly favor action to get artificial trans fat out of their
restaurants. We also heard from restaurant operators who voiced real
difficulties making the transition, and we've changed implementation
plans to help restaurants implement the new regulations."
Background Information about Revisions to Trans Fat Proposal
This proposal allows restaurants six months to switch to oils,
margarines and shortening used for frying and spreading that have
less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving. After 18 months, all
other food items including all margarines and shortenings must
contain less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving. In response to
comments received, the Department will:
Allow more time (18 months instead of 6) to replace artificial trans
fat used in baking and in deep-frying yeast doughs and cake batters
Provide technical support for restaurants and bakeries
Helpline staffed by recognized culinary science experts
Training for restaurant personnel
Resource materials, including brochures, practical tips and
information about alternatives
Provide 3 month grace period (July 1, 2007 Oct. 1, 2007) with no
fines for items in the 6 month phase-out category
Provide 3 month grace period (July 1, 2008 Oct. 1, 2008) with no
fines for items in the 18 month phase-out category
Create separate category of violations which will be posted and the
web but will not determine pass/fail of routine sanitary inspections
A summary of all comments, including lists of those in support or
opposition, is available online at
comments-response.pdf. A total of 2,340 written comments were
received (including 53 people who spoke at the October 30 public
hearing). Overall, 2,266 (95%) comments supported the proposal and
74 were in opposition. Unqualified support for the proposed changes
came from numerous leading national and local professional
societies, academic institutions, and local hospitals and advocacy
groups, including the American Medical Association (AMA), National
Hispanic Medical Association (NHMA), American College of Cardiology
(ACC), American Cancer Society (ACS), American Diabetes Association
(ADA), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), New York Academy of
Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, Harvard University,
New York University, Institute for Urban Family Health, and Northern
Manhattan Perinatal Partnership.
O'Reilly: U.S. may have to "level cities like Tehran"
Wednesday December 6, 2006
On the December 5 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show,
Bill O'Reilly asserted that "we may have to" "level cities like
Tehran, kill hundreds of thousands of people," which, he explained,
the United States has "already done in Germany and Japan." O'Reilly
then argued that such a move would be necessary, for example, "[i]f
Iran takes over Iraq and then fosters a revolution inside Saudi
Arabia ... and gets control of all the oil and says we're not
selling to the USA, we are going to level that country, because
you ... need gasoline to live."
From the December 5 edition of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with
O'REILLY: The United States will never be conquered by Muslims --
ever. But you don't want it to reach the point where, we have to,
example, you know, level cities like Tehran, kill hundreds of
thousands of people, which we may have to do -- which we have
already done in Germany and Japan. OK? We have already killed
hundreds of thousands of people on one day. Now, do we want to do
that again? Of course not, but we may have to.
Example: If Iran takes over Iraq and then fosters a revolution
inside Saudi Arabia, which Iran wants to do, and overthrows that
kingdom and gets control of all the oil and says we're not selling
to the USA, we are going to level that country, because you,
[caller], need gasoline to live. See? Now that's the biggest example
I can give you.
Carter nixes debate with outspoken prof
Fri Dec 15, 2006
Former President Carter turned down a request to debate Alan
Dershowitz about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying the
outspoken Harvard law professor "knows nothing about the situation."
Carter, author of a new book advocating "peace not apartheid" in the
region, said he will not visit Brandeis University to discuss the
book because the university requested he debate Dershowitz.
"I don't want to have a conversation even indirectly with
Dershowitz," Carter said in Friday's Boston Globe. "There is no
need ... to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about
the situation in Palestine."
The school's debate request, Carter said, is proof that many in the
United States are unwilling to hear an alternative view on the
nation's most taboo foreign policy issue, Israel's occupation of
Carter brokered the 1978 Camp David peace accord between Israel and
Egypt and received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. He said the goal
of his book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," is to provoke
dialogue and action.
"There is no debate in America about anything that would be critical
of Israel," he said.
The reference to "apartheid," the word for South Africa's former
system of state-sanctioned racial segregation, has angered some
rabbis because it appears to equate that system with the treatment
"President Carter said he wrote the book because he wanted to
encourage more debate; then why won't he debate?" said Dershowitz, a
vocal First Amendment advocate who has worked for O.J. Simpson and
other high-profile clients.
Brandeis was founded in 1948 as a nonsectarian university under the
sponsorship of the American Jewish community. Carter said he
initially was interested in going there.
"I thought it would be a good idea to go to a campus that had a lot
of Jewish students and get a lot questions," he said. But then the
initial proposal evolved into a plan for a debate.
Thursday, Dec. 14, 2006
What Has Mel Gibson Got Against the Church?
Christianity makes only a brief appearance in his film Apocalypto.
And it's not exactly welcomed
By DAVID VAN BIEMA
For the Christian viewer, the biggest question about Mel Gibson's
movie Apocalypto is: why does its hero turn away from the Cross at
All in all, there's not a lot of Christ passionate or otherwise
in Apocalypto, Mel Gibson's first film since The Passion of the
Christ. But a crucifix finally shows up at the film's end, and the
film's response to it is surprisingly equivocal.
The movie tells the story of a peaceful 16th-century jungle-dweller
named Jaguar Paw. The first quarter of the film presents his idyllic
village as a kind of Eden. The second quarter is a vision of Hell,
as a raiding party for the nearby Mayan empire torches the town,
rapes the women and drags the men to the Mayan capital as featured
guests at a monstrous and ongoing sacrifice to the gods. JP watches
in horror as a priest has several of his friends spread-eagled on
squat stone, then hacks out their still-beating hearts and displays
them to a howling crowd. JP narrowly avoids the same fate, escapes,
and spends most of the rest of the film picking off an armed pursuit
party, one by one, in classic action-film fashion.
It is only at the very end that Christianity makes a brief but
portentous appearance, aboard a fleet of Spanish ships that appears
suddenly on the horizon. JP and his long-suffering wife watch from
the jungle as a small boat approaches shore bearing a long-bearded,
shiny-helmeted explorer and a kneeling priest holding high a
crucifix-topped staff. "Should we join them?" asks his wife. "No,"
he replies: They should go back to the jungle, their home. Roll
Given Gibson's fervent Christianity, you might have expected JP to
run up and genuflect. Why does he turn away?
My colleague, film critic Richard Schickel, has observed that Gibson
has little use for the institutional Roman Catholic church,
preferring a "less mainstream version of his faith." True, but the
Traditionalists with whom Gibson is often associated are defined
primarily by their objections to the liberalizations under the
Second Vatican Council of 1962-5 not an issue in Jaguar Paw's day.
Another explanation is that the director has always been better at
Crucifixions than at Resurrections. Just as the risen Christ seemed
like something of a tack-on to The Passion, Mel may have little
interest in how Christian culture might reconfigure either the
peaceful village-dwellers' way of life or the bloodthirsty Mayans'.
The third possibility, it seems to me, is that Gibson does know
and wants no part of it. I tend toward that last one because it
reflects a learning curve of my own. About a year ago I visited an
exhibit on another Mexican civilization, the Aztecs, at New York's
Guggenheim Museum. The show was cleverly arranged. Visitors walked
up the Guggenheim's giant spiral, the first few twists of which were
devoted to the Aztecs' stunning stylized carvings of snakes, eagles
and other god/animals, and explanations of how the ingenious Aztecs
filled in a huge lake to lay the foundation for Tenochtitlan, now
It was only about halfway up the spiral when it had become harder
to run screaming for an exit that one encountered a grey-green
stone about three feet high. It was sleek and beautiful almost
like a Brancusi sculpture, I thought until I read the label. It
was a sacrifice stone of the sort in the movie. Not a reproduction,
not a non-functioning ceremonial model, but the real thing. People
had died on this. I felt shocked and a little angry it was like
coming across a gas chamber at an exhibit of interior design.
But I kept walking, and at the very top of the museum I encountered
another object that might be considered an answer to the sinister
rock: a stone cross, carved after the Spanish had conquered the
Aztecs and were attempting to convert them to Catholicism. Rather
than Jesus's full body, it bore a series of small relief carvings:
his head and wounded hands, blood drops and a sacrificial Aztec
How striking, I thought. Here was a potent work of iconographic
propaganda using the very symbols of a brutal religion to turn its
values inside out, manipulating its images so that they celebrated
not the sacrifice, but the person who was sacrificed. Visually, at
least, it seemed an elegant and admirable transition. And after
seeing Apocalypto, I wondered why Gibson hadn't created the
cinematic equivalent: an ode to the progression out of savagery,
through the vehicle of Christianity.
The answer, of course, is that the cross's iconography was a lot
simpler than Mexican history. I called Charles C. Mann, author of
the highly respected history 1491: New Revelations of the Americas
Before Columbus. Mann first noted a couple of anachronisms in the
film. The Mayan capital, including any great temple of the sort in
the film, had mysteriously disappeared 700 years before the Spanish
arrived. Moreover, although the Mayans probably engaged in some
human sacrifice, there is no evidence that they practiced it on the
industrial scale depicted in the movie For that, as the Guggenheim
exhibit suggested, one would have to look 300 miles west to the
Aztecs, who had made it their religious centerpiece. Hernan Cortes,
(who probably rounded upward, since he conquered them) claimed the
Aztecs dispatched between three and four thousand souls a year that
way. Why Gibson decided to turn the Mayans into Aztecs is anyone's
Most interesting, however, was Mann's observation that if the boat
Jaguar Paw sees is indeed the 1519 landing party of Cortes, (who
pushed quickly through what remained of Mayan territory on his way
to the bloody battle of Tenochtitlan), the man holding up the cross
was no particular friend to the indians. It was not until 1537, Mann
said, that, after considerable debate both ways, Pope Paul III got
around to proclaiming that "Indians themselves indeed are true men"
and should not be "deprived of their liberty." In the intervening 18
years roughly a third of Mexico's 25 million indigenous population
died of smallpox the Europeans brought with them, and the Spanish
had enslaved most of the remaining six million able-bodied men. And
that's not counting the 100,000 Aztecs Cortes killed in at
So here is the conundrum. If you had to choose between a culture
that placed ritualized human slaughter at the center of its faith,
but that only managed to kill 4,000 people a year; and a culture
that put the sacrificial Lamb of God at the center of the universe
but somehow found its way to countenancing the enslavement of
millions and the slaughter of hundreds of thousands in the same
neighborhood, which would be more appealing?
Perhaps Gibson's problem is with the institutional church after all.
Not the institutional church of Vatican II, but the church that
managed to get so mixed up with worldy power that it was able to
side with the centurians rather than with Christ for thos crucial 18
And perhaps he was right to have Jaguar Paw, having sampled the
worst that the first civilization had to offer, take one look at the
arrival of the second, and head back into the woods.